Pakistan Case Law← Search
PLJ 2016 Cr.C. (Lahore) 239

MUHAMMAD FIAZ, etc. Petitioners vs STATE, etc.

CitationPLJ 2016 Cr.C. (Lahore) 239
CourtLahore High Court
Case No.Crl. Misc. No. 5475-B of 2015
Date2015-09-29
Judge(s)Aslam Javed Minhas
ResultBail confirmed

ORDER

' Muhammad Fayyaz, Muhammad Iftikhar and Muhammad Shahbaz, petitioners seek their pre- arrest bail in case FIR No. 222/15 dated 30.05.2015, registered under Sections 337-A.I), 337-A(iii) and 34, PPC, at Police Station Chowk Azam, District Layyah.

2. The allegation against the petitioners as set forth in the FIR is they, along with their accomplices, in furtherance of their common intention, inflicted fists blows on the person of complainant, due to which, his two teeth were broken.

3. Heard. Record perused.

4. Perusal of record reflects that there is delay of more than 8 days in lodging the FIR which is unexplained. As per police record, the role of Muhammad Fayyaz and Muhammad Iftikhar, Petitioners Nos. 1 and 2 is general one whereas the quarrel was only took place between the complainant and Muhammad Shahbaz, Petitioner No. 3 who gave fist blow on the face of complainant due to which, he became injured and his two teeth were broken. MLC is there to support the said accusation.

5. In view of the above, since Muhammad Shahbaz, prima facie, appears to have been involved in the commission of alleged offence and sufficient material in the shape of MLC and statements of the PWs are available on record, therefore, I am not inclined to extend this extra ordinary relief of pre-arrest bail in his favour. As such, this petition to his extent is hereby dismissed.

6. So far as the case of Muhammad Iftikhar and Muhammad Fayyaz, petitioners is concerned, they have been attributed a general role of fighting and giving slaps on the face of complainant. To what extent, they have participated in the occurrence, is the question, which would be adjudged at trial stage. According to the Investigating Officer, they have joined the investigation, which is even otherwise complete. Handing over their custody to the police, at this stage, would not serve any useful purpose to the prosecution.

7. In view of the above, this petition to the extent of Petitioners Nos. 1 and 2 is hereby accepted and the ad-interim pre-arrest bail already granted to them is hereby confirmed subject to their furnishing fresh bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One hundred Thousand) each with ne surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court, whereas the petition to the extent of Muhammad Shahbaz, Petitioner No. 2 is hereby dismissed.

8. The observations referred above are only of tentative in nature and would not prejudice the trial of the case.

For educational and research use only — not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.
Disclaimer·Privacy·Terms·Search